Could You Homeschool (Mostly) Without Books

[shinyhappypeople]

Could you educate your child in a way that isn't BOOK focused?  

 

I'm not sure if I could, but the idea of this captures my imagination.  It kind of reminds me of one of Hunter's famous "Desert Island" scenarios.  

 

If books couldn't play a central role in the education of your children, how would you accomplish it?

 

(I love books.  This feels like blasphemy.  But, teach the child you have... etc.)

 

The only required role for books that I can think of would be living books for reading (for either practice or pleasure, but no reading textbooks), maybe a math book, and books for your own edification and encouragement (eta: and self-education in order to be able to teach subjects appropriately).

 

The rest of your child's education would need to be accomplished through discussion, art, videos/movies, games, sports, field trips, practical work, and so on.  Books would be minor players, used only as needed.  Think of them as the garnish, and everything else makes up the main dish.

 

This isn't unschooling, necessarily (unless you want it to be).  You could still have an overall plan and be actively teaching and guiding, just without the  big pile o' books.

 

Could you do it?  Would you?

 

 

 

 

[Arcadia]

Not unless I outsource almost everything. I don't really like to talk or discuss, I prefer to listen and observe.

 

I won't have a problem planting my kids in front of the screen watching documentaries though, just that they would need to discuss with each other or my hubby.

 

Field trips and hands on would be easy for me. We did plenty of those including road trips.

 

I enjoy chatting now and then but discussion everyday would drain me out.

[Hunter]

Ella Frances Lynch

Bookless Lessons

https://archive.org/details/booklesslessons00lyncgoog

[Hunter]

As Arcadia said, it would drain me.

[HelenNotOfTroy]

I could teach some things, but only what I already know. I wouldn't want to try it, unless if I knew as much as the father in The Swiss Family Robinson.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I do this to some extent.  But I read the books and learn the material really well first.  

 

Science - I follow Galore Park's "So You Really Want to Learn Science" and we get the concept explanation through YouTube.  (Lammas Science esp. has good videos that follow the concepts as set out by UK's science standards.)  Then I make a point of getting the materials and the equipment needed to actually do the experiments.  Again, if you search YouTube for certain experiments you will generally find them - with step by step instructions if they are ones that can be safely done at home.  

 

Math - We use Khan Academy and I actually teach the material.  There are a bazillion posts on here where I explain how I do this.  

 

History - I use YouTubes like Crash Course History and Mr. Zoller.  Again - I have to be prepared and look ahead for these.  I'm adding more books in here despite resistance but YMMV on this.

 

Writing and Language Arts  - We write and revise and write some more.  You can do grammar based off of what you write too but again you have to know the material well.

 

Vocab - we use a book (Wordly Wise) but really you could just use these words in conversation.  

 

Foreign Language - we use a program that uses CDs as well as games and apps like DuoLingo.

 

 

 

[shinyhappypeople]

I could teach some things, but only what I already know. I wouldn't want to try it, unless if I knew as much as the father in The Swiss Family Robinson.

 

You're allowed to use books for yourself.  Just very few, if any, books for your child. Imagine a child with an allergy to the written word (I weep, this is my life).    Would that make you more willing or able to do it?

 

I'm just curious how people would make this work... or not.  

[deerforest]

never mind..

[Jean in Newcastle]

PS for my child who has trouble with the written word, I also have assigned one project a week from DIY.org.  She can choose the project but it must be done to completion.  I help if needed.  

 

We focus on a lot of hands on stuff so that school is just as challenging, if not more so, than that done primarily with books.  

[shinyhappypeople]

By the way, what prompted this discussion was staring at our empty kitchen table this morning, thinking about the plan for today for older DD, pulling out the K-nex kit that she's never used and thinking, "Why not?"  We're doing our first "Private Eye" sketch today, too :)

 

While we wait for answers on her learning struggles, why not go completely outside the box, use the box as a step stool or a fort or a table and do things completely differently.  Clearly what we've tried hasn't been effective.

 

 

[HS Mom in NC]

Honey, I have over 4,000 books in my house.  I could hardly breathe without books, much less homeschool without them.  Not.  interested.

 

I've homeschooled long enough in a big enough homeschooling community to believe that there probably are people out there who've done it well without many books.

[FairProspects]

Do I have the internet and a computer with programs? Can I read aloud from the books I have? Do the kids have Kindle Fires with Immersion Reading and does that count as a book?

 

If so, then yes, this is mostly how I educate now. It is draining and exhausting, but I am mainly the medium for information getting to the kids simply because we have some of the same learning issues and have had to get around them. We operate mostly by discussions, read alouds, documentaries, classes (some one else lecturing aloud), and projects.

[SamanthaBea]

I can, and I do! :001_smile:  Due to my ds's issues with reading (OCD--reading takes FOREVER and is utterly exhausting for him), books are much more of a "garnish." For English, he watches the Lost Tools of Writing videos (yes, I know that they are actually made for the teacher). Also, he listens to an LOTR audiobook instead of reading it for Literary Lessons from the Lord of the Rings. He watches two different Great Courses classes for U.S. history. For chemistry, he watches the Virtual Homeschool Group lessons, videos from Conceptual Academy, Bozeman Science videos, and Crash Course videos. For algebra, he watches the Virtual Homeschool Group lessons, and--if needed--he can also watch the DIVE videos or the Saxon Teacher videos.

 

DS still reads every day, but I limit the amount due to how long it takes him. We wouldn't be able to cover much of anything if I required that he read everything from a book instead of listening/watching the same information.

[shinyhappypeople]

Do I have the internet and a computer with programs? Can I read aloud from the books I have? Do the kids have Kindle Fires with Immersion Reading and does that count as a book?

 

Computer and software?  Absolutely.

 

Immersion reading?  Sure, for pleasure/practice. (Immersion reading is one of the best.things.ever. for my older DD.  Oh, how I love it.)

 

My question is really, could you pull it off if you had to?  Would you even want to try? It's totally fine to say, "No way," btw.

 

Here's what I'm getting at, I think.  (I'm still trying to figure out the point of this for myself :) )

I think most of us assume that our kids must or ought to learn primarily through the medium of books/reading.  There's almost a moral superiority attached to education coming from a big pile of books, you know?  

 

But beyond a need for literacy (no argument from me) I wonder if learning through books is really essential to all or most kids.  Maybe.  But maybe not.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I love reading, I love books, and one of my main learning styles is visual-text.  Books are my thing.  

 

I just wonder, is there another way to approach homeschool that looks totally different from the way things are normally done but still works?  For me, that means, dancing with the idea of, "What if we scrapped most books.  What would learning look like then?"

[mama27]

This could be done but I think it would require a lot of going and doing things, such as going to the zoo, going to the museums, going a lot of places and doing a lot of things.

 

 

 

[vickjul]

Could I homeschool without textbooks? Absolutely. In fact, math, phonics, and grammar are the only subjects for which we routinely use textbooks. But homeschooling without books or with very few books would be an altogether different matter. My kids deem books as essential as water or oxygen. We can do a lot in the elementary years with our backyard, art supplies, quality toys, and carefully selected video clips. But my kids want to be able to pick up a book (or a stack of books) and read more, more, more about whatever time, place, person, or science concept we're studying at the moment.

[ElizaG]

Ella Frances Lynch

Bookless Lessons

https://archive.org/details/booklesslessons00lyncgoog

Note, though, that the "bookless" part is only up to age 7-ish.   Ages 8-ish and up are gradually using more books, including literature, reference books, and textbooks, until by age 10 or 12 they're doing a pretty typical secondary curriculum. 

 

The reference books are essential for her method -- first for the parent, then for the child -- to look up unfamiliar words and concepts from the literature.   (It's sort of the opposite of the newer approach, where you read from a core non-fiction text and then choose literature to supplement it.)   As parents, we can look things up on the Internet, but I think a shelf or two of reliable books would be necessary for a child working independently.   

 

We have many books in our house, but putting together a "school library" that's adequate, but minimalist, is the part of her approach I'm finding most challenging.  By contrast, the parent-mediated lessons are turning out to be relatively easy, after the initial learning curve.  Yes, they are tiring.  But at least it's a good kind of tiring.   :001_smile:

[Ellie]

Could you educate your child in a way that isn't BOOK focused?  

 

I'm not sure if I could, but the idea of this captures my imagination.  It kind of reminds me of one of Hunter's famous "Desert Island" scenarios.  

 

If books couldn't play a central role in the education of your children, how would you accomplish it?

 

(I love books.  This feels like blasphemy.  But, teach the child you have... etc.)

 

The only required role for books that I can think of would be living books for reading (for either practice or pleasure, but no reading textbooks), maybe a math book, and books for your own edification and encouragement (eta: and self-education in order to be able to teach subjects appropriately).

 

The rest of your child's education would need to be accomplished through discussion, art, videos/movies, games, sports, field trips, practical work, and so on.  Books would be minor players, used only as needed.  Think of them as the garnish, and everything else makes up the main dish.

 

This isn't unschooling, necessarily (unless you want it to be).  You could still have an overall plan and be actively teaching and guiding, just without the  big pile o' books.

 

Could you do it?  Would you?

 

By "book," do you mean textbooks? Because heck yeah, I could teach my dc at home without textbooks for *most* things.

 

[Arcadia]

But beyond a need for literacy (no argument from me) I wonder if learning through books is really essential to all or most kids. Maybe. But maybe not.

I learn a trade through observing, absorbing and hands-on through the manufacturing facilities my uncles and cousins own. My friends learn to be hairdressers and tailors through apprenticeship.

 

With all the MOOC like Coursera, EdX, Udemy which has videos, Khan which has videos and quizzes, free educational podcasts that a child can listen to and absorb, a child which have difficulties with the written word has plenty of other avenues to gain knowledge.

 

30 years ago, I would need to read my biology textbook cover to cover to do well on my high school exam. Now I can cover almost the same ground with videos, other than the spelling part of biology.

 

ETA:

I could do a brain dump and teach my kids without textbooks until probably 8th grade but it would be exhausting to do that for every subject.

[shinyhappypeople]

I learn a trade through observing, absorbing and hands-on through the manufacturing facilities my uncles and cousins own. My friends learn to be hairdressers and tailors through apprenticeship.

 

With all the MOOC like Coursera, EdX, Udemy which has videos, Khan which has videos and quizzes, free educational podcasts that a child can listen to and absorb, a child which have difficulties with the written word has plenty of other avenues to gain knowledge.

 

30 years ago, I would need to read my biology textbook cover to cover to do well on my high school exam. Now I can cover almost the same ground with videos, other than the spelling part of biology.

 

ETA:

I could do a brain dump and teach my kids without textbooks until probably 8th grade but it would be exhausting to do that for every subject.

 

This is how my older DD learns.  Just let her DO and she'll teach herself what she wants to know. (ETA: though a mentor helps!) This is especially true for cooking.  She uses cookbooks the way she uses a knife or pan - as a tool, but it's not about the cookbook, it's about the cooking.  

 

The trick is expanding this idea to skill areas like math and spelling. 

[Critterfixer]

 

My question is really, could you pull it off if you had to?  Would you even want to try? It's totally fine to say, "No way," btw.

 

I couldn't pull it off if I wanted to. I wouldn't want to. So, no way.  :laugh: I don't have the infrastructure to pull it off: I don't have the internet access, I don't have an area rich in culture and hands-on opportunities, and I certainly don't have the personal depth of knowledge needed to make it work.

[lllll]

nm

[Desert Strawberry]

If we could use online course work (like Khan Academy) and e-books/audio books, yes. I think so. There's so much stuff out there. We have done a lot of learning through documentaries and interactive websites. I would say we are roughly 50/50 books vs unbooks. We could go fully unbook if needed.

[Hunter]

I know this is considered educational neglect by many here, but I set the bar lower when I realize that a student is not able to work independently.

 

I'm not sure if you are talking about a driven independent learner, who just needs resources that are not books as often as possible. That is different than a book-allergic student that needs everything spoon-fed as if they were a late-reading 1st or 2nd grader.

 

Over the past few years, I have been trying to narrow down what is necessary to teach students that will never be independent learners and will always need to be explicitly spoon-fed material.

 

And some of those do get occasionally excited about non-book projects, but they are disorganized flightly students that are not ever going to settle down to an organized body of knowledge that will result in an upwardly mobile future. So I feed their flights of fancy, but don't try to box it into something it isn't. They themselves often label it as self-soothing rather than self-education. It is about the moment, not the future.

 

I'm just done trying to help every student aim for an education that will ensure they can earn a top 10% income. Only 10% get to be in the top 10%. That is one out of nine. A lot of people make up the bottom 90%.

 

Have you looked at Layers of Learning? LOL has a lot of projects, that might be considered busy work, by many here, but...if I needed a set course of projects to keep a book-allergic kid busy and compliant with education laws, I might use that.

[Arcadia]

The trick is expanding this idea to skill areas like math and spelling.

For math, my mom learn elementary math through being a cashier at my granduncle's coffee shop (family owned). My dad learn geometry and trigonometry through carpentry and metalwork. My parents generation (born at or before WW2) learn algebra through daily life making their own equations from real life problems and solving for unknowns. They have no problems understanding compound interest on certificate of deposits as a child and on loans as an adult without being explicitly taught.

 

For geometry, let her draw with compass and ruler, let her construct with sticks or straws, let her discover the axioms without having to read a geometry textbook.

[Hunter]

I would have to do research on cultures where they do this effectively. It IS a fascinating idea. Our culture definitely seems centered around book learning.

 

I know one set of my dh's grandparents couldn't read or write. I think they had excellent memories (of necessity) and they learned their math in daily life. They were actually great at mental math, as we would call it today. But I don't know much else about how they learned. And I think their mentality was more survival mode versus learning mode. I know they didn't like TV so never watched it, and computers and such things didn't exist back then, so none of that either. They were very 'sharp' people - always watching, super alert to everything in their environment, etc. I suppose that came from having to rely on the senses?

Exactly, our culture is book-learning-centered. What is most valued is book-centered. To deviate from the books isn't going to get a student where the book-centered kids are. It's going to look different.

 

If that kid is driven and independent, it might get them somewhere awesome, but different awesome.

 

There is a man who plays the spoons for a living and has played for the Pope. His life is awesome. But I doubt whether it mattered if mom was a martyr or not dreaming up creative ways to spoon-feed him what was in the books SHE read, past the absolute basics.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I don't consider getting content through audio, visual and kinesthetic means to necessarily be "spoon feeding".  After all, many schools have teachers who teach concepts directly without having kids reading a textbook.  In fact, I would say that is better than being spoon fed facts through a textbook.  The only shortfall, in my mind is when it comes to literature.  There are ways to learn the stories and to interact with literature through audio and visual means but I do think that does dilute the content a bit from reading it directly from the original source.  

[Guest]

Computer and software?  Absolutely.

 

Immersion reading?  Sure, for pleasure/practice. (Immersion reading is one of the best.things.ever. for my older DD.  Oh, how I love it.)

 

My question is really, could you pull it off if you had to?  Would you even want to try? It's totally fine to say, "No way," btw.

 

Here's what I'm getting at, I think.  (I'm still trying to figure out the point of this for myself :) )

I think most of us assume that our kids must or ought to learn primarily through the medium of books/reading.  There's almost a moral superiority attached to education coming from a big pile of books, you know?  

 

But beyond a need for literacy (no argument from me) I wonder if learning through books is really essential to all or most kids.  Maybe.  But maybe not.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I love reading, I love books, and one of my main learning styles is visual-text.  Books are my thing.  

 

I just wonder, is there another way to approach homeschool that looks totally different from the way things are normally done but still works?  For me, that means, dancing with the idea of, "What if we scrapped most books.  What would learning look like then?"

 

My knee-jerk reaction to the question is definitely not.

 

But that's not right, exactly.

 

I wouldn't want to, sure, but that's not what you're asking, and I have no reason to consider it, as you do.

 

So what I am thinking would be the biggest hurdle for *us* without relying heavily on books, would be that there would suddenly be a dearth of questions from my kids. Our days would be A LOT more top-down from me to them, rather from them-to me-back to them.....from conversations arising from their questions.

 

I feel like we'd have a lot less to talk about! They would want to know fewer things.

 

But if you're already not as reliant on books to fill up a lot of your day, then I don't suppose you'd run into that as much as we would.

[Farrar]

Well, I came prepared to say no. I'm not interested in even thinking about trying. But then I read your update.

 

We have to educate the child in front of us. I hope that if I was presented with that challenge that I would take it on for the sake of the child.

 

Okay... so... if I had to be mostly without books...

 

For math, we'd use Right Start or Miquon in the early grades and focus on the games and the manipulatives and doing work on the white board. We might do Dreambox. I'd move toward using Khan, more and more advanced games, maybe something like Teaching Textbooks or eventually Tablet Class. We'd use lots of apps like Dragonbox and video games like TimezAttack.

 

For science, I'd do hands on science. There's plenty of options there. If I didn't want to DIY it with experiment books (for me to prepare things), TOPS would be a good choice. And the ACS materials, which are based in learning by doing would be good. We'd watch tons of videos - NOVA episodes, Cosmos, everything by Attenborough. We'd go to the zoo a lot, do more nature studies than we do otherwise, do science classes. We already do a lot of this, we just also do books.

 

For history it starts to get a little harder. I might base things around living history and drama - do lots of living history field trips, put on plays about history, watch movies about history... Or maybe I'd forgo history altogether and focus on geography as a base. That way, you can play games like Ticket to Ride, 10 Days..., Scrambled States, etc. and online games. And do lots of Sheppard Software. And then from there do lots of cultural stuff but focus on things that aren't the stories - focus on art, cooking, economics, etc. Draw maps and get good at freehand drawing them. Doesn't Mapping the World with Art do some of this stuff?

 

For English... hmm... obviously you can't avoid books entirely. Here's where you use up the "book credits" that you have. I'd probably try to do more narration though and for older level students focus on things like speeches and oratory and debate, which are all good "writing" adjacent skills. I'd probably go even more project based with learning than I am now. For example, right now we're doing 90 Second Newbery where you make a film from a Newbery book and I think that's the sort of project we'd do a lot of - reading, check, writing (the script, the organization, the checklists, etc.), check, outside the box and technology incorporated, check.

 

How's that?

[shinyhappypeople]

Exactly. As it is, I can talk to my kids for hours about whatever, without the pressure to necessarily be right. They ask something, I don't know the answer, and I can go "that's a great question, let's try to find out more about that later, but meanwhile, what do YOU think about that?"

 

There's something to be said about a balance between book-learning and other types of learning. It's also important to differentiate between textbooks and just books. Even then, it's possible to use textbooks as "just books". Textbooks often seek to offer authoritative answers, whereas "just books" are the start of an exploratory adventure. 

 

I think that because we have nearly constant access to high speed internet, it's just as easy to say "google it" or "let's find a youtube video" as it is to look it up in a book.  If we didn't have the internet, it would definitely be harder.

[Hunter]

Well, I came prepared to say no. I'm not interested in even thinking about trying. But then I read your update.

 

We have to educate the child in front of us. I hope that if I was presented with that challenge that I would take it on for the sake of the child.

 

Okay... so... if I had to be mostly without books...

 

I don't get stressed by teaching the student in front of me, unless I'm feeling pressured to produce results that don't match the student in front of me.

 

Teachers are measured by their ability to produce students that appear to have been book taught.

[Farrar]

I don't get stressed by teaching the student in front of me, unless I'm feeling pressured to produce results that don't match the student in front of me.

 

Teachers are measured by their ability to produce students that appear to have been book taught.

 

I'm not usually stressed by it, but I do see it as my mission - teach the child I have or the student I've got, not some version of the student that I wish existed. Sometimes that's challenging, of course.

 

Teachers are rarely measured fairly so I can't think about that. I think my goal is to produce a child who can succeed at a variety of their own potential goals in the real world one day and continue his or her own learning through life. I believe having a broad education that includes a good bit of reading and writing is the best path, but the mission to educate the child you've got is paramount on some level. If a broad, book based program won't work, it won't. End of story. And a child who is allergic to the written word isn't going to suddenly want to become a journalist or an English professor or something, so I would just need to find another way to provide a broad education that could lead to potential goals - but the potential goals are what's been reframed. And that's what ties to teaching the child in front of you, not some version you wish existed. We can wish that a child will go to college and become a lawyer or a doctor or whatever till the cows come home, but if that child's goals are to work with his hands or be an artist, you can't always change that.

[abba12]

 

I think most of us assume that our kids must or ought to learn primarily through the medium of books/reading.  There's almost a moral superiority attached to education coming from a big pile of books, you know?  

 

I agree with this 100%. And I personally have never understood the reason for books being this.... holy grail of learning. Don't get me wrong, I was an avid reader as a child, but many of the most useful things I've learned didn't come from books. They came from media, or life. So, I'm going to deviate from the crowd and say I could definitely do it. In fact, I'd be more able to do that, than to go full CM. 

 

Math - Miquon, Khan, lots of game-apps. There's so many great computer and tablet based math games right through middle school, and khan academy covers high school and beyond very well

 

English - Is writing allowed? If so, I'd try teach all the language arts through writing. If writing is out alongside reading though.... I'd use my 'few books' here, carefully chosen literature and as much writing as the student will tolerate. Also, again, there's lots of computer games and apps for language, and things like scrabble and boggle are good for spelling. 

 

Science - Documentaries. In fact this is basically how I handle science now. And hands on science experiments.. And just generally observational science for the early years. My kids and I talk about scientific things we observe in life all the time.  Things like snap circuits and lego education kits are good too. 

 

History - Again, documentaries. Then discuss the documentary with the student to ensure they understood it. I see no difference between a good quality documentary and a good book, I hate the elitism that giving my child a book on something is wonderful but sitting them in front of a good doco once a day is somehow a 'cop out' or slacking off. Also, a few field trips would help. And then I'd focus more on social studies than history (I'm not that keen on history as a major, 12-year subject to begin with though). Learn about other cultures, you can do this by studying yourself and then passing the knowledge on, or meeting people of other nationalities and asking them questions.

 

I also consider drawing, piano, logic, computer skills, and art (creation, not appreciation) to be vital subjects in our homeschool, all of which can be done without books.

[Desert Strawberry]

Just coming back to say, this would be easier with just one child, I think. I work eyeball to eyeball with Gem (starting first grade), but my other two are fairly independent. I can't give that level of attention to all three kids and I surely couldn't care for my babies as well.

[Farrar]

A lot of the solutions that people are tossing out (in as much as we've been willing to entertain this game) do involve conversation and direct teaching. But a lot of them involve videos and technology. I don't know that after about 4th grade if this would be any more parent intensive than any other sort of teaching. And I'm of the view that most kids before that are just inevitably pretty parent/teacher intensive no matter what you do.

[Jean in Newcastle]

A lot of the solutions that people are tossing out (in as much as we've been willing to entertain this game) do involve conversation and direct teaching. But a lot of them involve videos and technology. I don't know that after about 4th grade if this would be any more parent intensive than any other sort of teaching. And I'm of the view that most kids before that are just inevitably pretty parent/teacher intensive no matter what you do.

My dd who is like this needs some teacher intensive teaching simply because she needs extra help on her weaknesses (ie. doing some learning through textbooks which tend to be at very least very sequential in nature). But at the same time I go ahead with with content areas in a way that will rely on strengths.  She is a visual spatial learner.  Learning through these methods are a good fit for that.  I put book work on the back burner for a couple of  years though because her struggles made it so that she was just shutting down.  Now that she is blossoming through the use of alternate ways of approaching material, she's able to handle us slowly adding in some studies that will stretch her a bit in reading.  I think she does need both ultimately because life is not all packaged up nicely for visual spatial learners since so much is geared for "normal" auditory-sequential learners.  Dd can read well but I do suspect some possible stealth dyslexia there as well which makes the drier less accessible books more work for her.  

[abba12]

A lot of the solutions that people are tossing out (in as much as we've been willing to entertain this game) do involve conversation and direct teaching. But a lot of them involve videos and technology. I don't know that after about 4th grade if this would be any more parent intensive than any other sort of teaching. And I'm of the view that most kids before that are just inevitably pretty parent/teacher intensive no matter what you do.

 

I agree. Sending a kid to watch a documentary and discussing it afterwards is no more intensive than sending a kid to read a book and discussing it afterwards. And games/apps are likely easier, and need no discussion! English would be harder and more hands-on, but, aside from field trips which we would do anyway, I don't see science being much harder once the child is old enough to set up experiments. There's more intensity in lesson prep, especially in the early years where you probably need to learn and then teach directly. But later on, I see little reason why it would need that much more attention, unless you're not in the habit of discussing what your child is reading already. 

 

Now, doing it in high school would be a nightmare, I've assumed we're talking elementary/middle here lol. 

[mamiof5]

Could I?? Maybe. But definitely not interested. Love books, we use them a lot, and for my sanity I need to keep track of what we are doing. My homeschooling is the opposite of "few books". We do lots of fieldtrips, but not interested in schooling with less books.

[Sk8ermaiden]

Nope. Nope. Nope. I mean, stranded on a desert island I'd do my best, but I wouldn't be able to enjoy it and I would feel my children's education would be lacking in certain areas. And I'm sure others can do it, but I would hate it. 

[shinyhappypeople]

Are workbooks part of books in this question?

 

 I suppose so. As I very seriously entertain this idea, I'd still include a math workbook and a handwriting workbook because it's necessary for us.   

 

Really the idea is simply how do we engage and teach kids who are everything BUT visual-text learners?   Shouldn't it be okay to pare books down to the absolute bare minimum and focus on playing to their strengths instead?  I'm assuming a reasonable level of literacy, of course.

 

It's a hard sell to this crowd because nearly everyone on this forum, myself included, has a deep regard for books and reading.  But, I think that actually makes it even more important to explore this idea of "What if my kid couldn't learn well through books? Could I still make homeschooling work?"

[Jean in Newcastle]

Shiny, you can do it.  I really admire the fact that you are being sensitive to who your dd is and are meeting her where she is.  It has been worth it for us and I think it will be worth it for you.  

 

One of the main beauties of homeschooling is that you can give an individualized education.  And yet, we tend to go from one systematized program (the public school system) to another systematized program ("mainstream" homeschooling curriculum).  Not that everyone does.  But I found myself struggling with wanting to follow the crowd and realizing that even in homeschooling I am a bit of an odd duck.  

 

I love books.  And I teaching from books.  But having to look outside books has benefited me too because sometimes books can be the safe thing.  

[shinyhappypeople]

So the basis of this is a child that doesn't do well looking at books? Then the books can still be used orally? I mean, that wasn't the question but that seems to be a solution.

 

We use an online curriculum for certain things, but even online there is a visual-text element.

 

My daughter is the inspiration for the question, but I'm really interested in hearing how other people would make it work for their kids so I can shamelessly steal my favorite ideas. :)   

 

So, you'd go with audio books?

 

I've gone farther and farther "out of the box" as the day has progressed.  Instead of step stool or table, it's been torn down and shoved into the recycle bin.  God grant me the courage not to pull it back out and duct tape it together come morning.

 

Oh, fun fact:  my other daughter is a highly visual text learner.  In other words, the exact opposite of her sister.  This should be interesting.

[Guest specsnomin]

I enjoy chatting now and then but discussion everyday would drain me out. 

[mama27]

 I suppose so. As I very seriously entertain this idea, I'd still include a math workbook and a handwriting workbook because it's necessary for us.   

 

Really the idea is simply how do we engage and teach kids who are everything BUT visual-text learners?   Shouldn't it be okay to pare books down to the absolute bare minimum and focus on playing to their strengths instead?  I'm assuming a reasonable level of literacy, of course.

 

It's a hard sell to this crowd because nearly everyone on this forum, myself included, has a deep regard for books and reading.  But, I think that actually makes it even more important to explore this idea of "What if my kid couldn't learn well through books? Could I still make homeschooling work?"

 

I've thought about this more and I see no reason why you couldn't do this. I love to read. I have (probably) almost 1000 books on my kindle. Not as many on my shelves after a move across several states last year. But so far only a few of my kids enjoy reading. I have actually been thinking lately of not forcing reading anymore simply because I see no POINT. It doesn't make them readers, my parents never read to me, yet I love it. I've read to my kids their whole lives and not all of them love it, 3 HATE reading. So, I've been doing things a little differently, more hands-on, more of me reading, than them. My current high schooler won't have anymore required reading but I will continue to read to her.

There are SOOOO many resources you could use, the more I think about it, them more I'm sure it can be done.

[Jean in Newcastle]

What we did yesterday in history was to "read discuss".  Ie.  I would read a couple of paragraphs in the history book, then we would discuss.  I would read a bit more and we would discuss it. . . .  It wasn't a textbook but more like an Usborne book that is dense with information and pictures.  

[EKS]

Does my reading aloud count as using books?  Because we do a lot of that--I read aloud and we stop and discuss as needed.

[lllll]

tmi

[Desert Strawberry]

My knee-jerk reaction to the question is definitely not.

 

But that's not right, exactly.

 

I wouldn't want to, sure, but that's not what you're asking, and I have no reason to consider it, as you do.

 

So what I am thinking would be the biggest hurdle for *us* without relying heavily on books, would be that there would suddenly be a dearth of questions from my kids. Our days would be A LOT more top-down from me to them, rather from them-to me-back to them.....from conversations arising from their questions.

 

I feel like we'd have a lot less to talk about! They would want to know fewer things.

 

But if you're already not as reliant on books to fill up a lot of your day, then I don't suppose you'd run into that as much as we would.

I whole heartedly disagree. If you were to eliminate books and replace them with nothing  then yes, there would be a vacuum. Then they would want to know less, because they would not be receiving the quantity or quality ofof information that they once did. 

But that's not what we're saying. It's not, could you teach your children without benefit of resources, it's could you teach your children with different resources.

I would like to think that the answer for all of us would be yes. Technology is available to self-teach pretty much anything without the use of a hard bound book.

[Desert Strawberry]

A lot of the solutions that people are tossing out (in as much as we've been willing to entertain this game) do involve conversation and direct teaching. But a lot of them involve videos and technology. I don't know that after about 4th grade if this would be any more parent intensive than any other sort of teaching. And I'm of the view that most kids before that are just inevitably pretty parent/teacher intensive no matter what you do.

Excellent point. 

[Guest]

I whole heartedly disagree. If you were to eliminate books and replace them with nothing  then yes, there would be a vacuum. Then they would want to know less, because they would not be receiving the quantity or quality ofof information that they once did. 

But that's not what we're saying. It's not, could you teach your children without benefit of resources, it's could you teach your children with different resources.

I would like to think that the answer for all of us would be yes. Technology is available to self-teach pretty much anything without the use of a hard bound book.

 

Yes, I understand we all have different families with different needs and proclivities.